I guess our biggest disagreement lies in the part of "Rogue was good". It is only good for tables without Feats, and only "feels" good to some players who only care "Oh I throw a lot of dices at a time!"
To me, and to so many players who do pay attention to "what's happening in the game" and the "boring math", Rogue was never good. It was the weakest class in 2014 and still is in 2024. Especially in 2014 where -5/+10 lived, the lack of Extra-Attack basically means a death penalty to a class who can't cast. When you're hiding and trying to get a shot that does a 20+DPR, your Ranger or Fighter or whatever Martial teammates are killing the dragon with 50~60+DPR each, with -5/+10 and advantages from your Casters.
I know this is the part where you and some players might start arguing that "B-But Rogues are for Out of Combats!", but com'on, this is a game that 80% of the contents are about combats and most official adventures are also stuffed with combats, combats, combats and combats. Is it really a good idea to design such a class in such a game? No. This is kind of an outdated designing philosophy that doesn't suits the current playstyle and the actual game.
Even if we talk about "Out of Combats", I still see no reason why two more skill proficiencies would suddenly turn Rogue into a "Out of Combats Master". Two more proficiencies only means you're only better by 10~15% of chance in passing a check than other characters who happened not taking those skills or happened not having the main stats for those skills, which normally you'd be having three teammates. The only differences lies in Expertise, which a Rogue often has to Expertise in Sleight of Hand and Thieves' Tools to make themselves useful enough, otherwise you are also not better than other characters who happen the needed stats, and still you'd be having 3~4 teammates normally.
Especially Mundane Skill Checks like Perception, Investigation, often could be rolled by all the party members in most adventures. Does the team successfully find something basically has nothing to do with the Rogue since you're not significantly good at these skills and "One Pass, Everyone Passed", rolling a N15 isn't that rare for 4~5 players.
I also don't see how could a Rogue could be count as "designed for Out of Combats" when Bards are there. Hell, Bards can do a better "Out of Combats" with JoAT, Expertise, and Spells, while doing a similar even higher DPR, safely with a Long Bow at level 6. After all they have the Valor Bard which grants them Extra-Attack while 2014 Rogue have none.
I know some may argue again "The Reliable Talent!", yeah, but, how many campaigns really reach level 11? According survery made by DNDBeyond, almost none.
So yeah, to me, and to many many players who felt the same thing and see the same thing, Rogue was never good in 2014, and still weak in 2024. You may feel good and had a great time and the DMs were allowing you to do blah-blah-blah, but the "boring math" and game desiging won't lie. What a class can do can be valued objectively through how much damage they could do and how much things they could achieve, and Skills in 5e is absolutely weak compared to spells, in an out of combats, while Rogue's damage also sucks.
Yes, Rogue is weak in 2014.
I know it might be hard to accept for some players who didn't pay much attention to the numbers, balancing, and "optimizations". I had my great time of playing Rogue too. In a great party, with a appropriate story, sure it could brings us fun, but game designing isn't about "did you had a great time", cuz you might have your fun, but not for many others. Game designing is about balacing without assuming the whole campaign is suitable or not. It's about "how to make players still having fun even if the campaign isn't specifically designed for them".
You make a lot of assumptions about me and blah blah blah boring system math. I've done the math, perhaps the issue is that I've done the math with a different baseline? Because I won't argue that PAM+GWM fighter is going to blow rogue damage out of the water, and rogues don't have a similar damage increasing combo. But we could crunch the numbers for longbow, or longsword and shield, or just GWM and the Rogue is not doing nearly as poorly. Yes, making a single shot that everything rides on hurts, and in that respect, the DPR can be increased with extra attack by simply making it more likely the rogue will land a hit. But that doesn't raise their ceiling by an appreciable amount, it just makes their average better.
I do want to note as well, this isn't purely martial with the -5/+10 you are talking about, but ALSO adding "advantage from casters". Perhaps you add that same advantage to rogues? I don't know, your post is unclear. But unlike the martials who needs the casters, Rogues can consistently generate their own advantage. Additionally, the GWM feat was balanced out. It now doesn't spike as high with advantage and is more reliable without it. This will lower the martial damage and make the rogue better by comparison.
Also, I note one of your complaints is Reliable talent coming online too late. They fixed that. It is supposed to come on by level 7 now, more in line with people's play experiences.
So, if we take some of these numbers... let's say level 11, max ability score, greatsword fighter, PAM fighter, and Rogue with a single d8 weapon. Baseline 65% to hit, adv gets 87.75%.
2014 Greatsword ~ 41.42 w/adv, 26.4 w/o adv
2014 PAM ~ 49.57 w/adv, 31.6 w/o adv
2014 Rogue ~ 26.76 w/adv, 19.82 w/o adv
2024 Greatsword ~ 35.1 w/adv, 26 w/o adv
2024 PAM ~ 37.73 w/adv, 27.95 w/o adv
2024 Rogue ~ 26.76 w/adv, 19.82 w/o adv
And we can demonstrate that the gap HAS SHRUNK. Now, I'm not going to claim my math is perfect. I didn't account for criticals, and maybe you disagree with my base numbers, but the gap between the two most damaging fighter builds, at the height of their power and a level that "According survery made by DNDBeyond, almost no[ne]" campaigns reach is SMALLER in 2024. Not bigger.
Now, we could argue that the Rogues should get even more, that their new abilities in battlefield control are not good enough, that a rogue with no feats supporting their damage should do MORE damage than a fighter with two feats increasing their damage... but the gap has already been closed by a significant degree, by using that boring blah blah blah math you seem to think I hate.
